| Was yesterday the death knell of the public option and, by extension, the chances of getting a healthcare reform bill passed this legislative session?
No. Jonathan Cohn:
Finance is but one committee--an important committee, to be sure, but one all the same. The bill from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee has a public plan. So do the bills that came out of three House committees over the summer. Senator Harry Reid has indicated he probably won't include a public plan when he merges the Finance and HELP proposals, but there will be a chance to add one duirng the floor vote debate and then again during conference committee deliberations, assuming the House passes one.
Remember, the public option doesn't need 60 votes in the Senate - as Baucus seems to be claiming - it needs 51. And, right now, it's likely a healthcare bill without the public option wouldn't pass the House. Even if reform passes the Senate without the public option, there's still reconciliation.
Despite how long it's seemed to take already, it's still early.
By the way, Jonathan Cohn reminds us about something we knew about the Senate all along, when he explains Jay Rockefeller's support of the public option:
Rockefeller's ability to channel these feelings may seem odd, given his privileged pedigree. But it makes sense given what he's done with his career. Remember, West Virginia didn't choose him. He chose West Virginia, starting with his service as a VISTA volunteer. He knows his constituents very well. And he acts that way.
You see this in his advocacy for the public plan. The arguments you hear in the debate are mostly about costs, payment rates, and how best to make a market function. But for Rockefeller, it really boils down to a simple proposition: A public plan is good because you know it will always be there for you.
The government isn't going to point to an obscure provision on page 152 of your manual and deny you essential services. The government isn't going to comb through your medical records and decide that, having taken your premiums for several months, you're not eligible for coverage after all. The government isn't going to stop offering coverage next year because it can't make a profit big enough to satisfy Wall Street.
Most Senators have no idea what's it's like to be in our shoes.
Cohn and others (Matt Singer?) think health care reform is worth passing without the public option. I disagree.
Without the public option, there's still no protection from having insurers denying claims for typos or other arbitrary reasons. There's no protection from insurers subverting your doctor and deciding what treatment you receive.
Without the public option, there's no guarantee insurers won't raise their prices across the board. In fact, the legislation as written gives insurers an incentive to raise prices, especially under the most progressive legislation with the largest and broadest subsidies. After all, the more expensive insurance is, the more consumers qualify for subsidies, and the more taxpayer money insurers receive. And you can bet the insurers' number-crunchers are right now writing their algorithms calculating to the dime exactly how much they can raise their rates before consumers would rather to pay a fine than purchase their product.
Frankly, without the public option, this healthcare reform is nothing but a large bribe paid out to the private insurance industry to cover our ill citizens, but without any corresponding guarantee or controls to ensure that the industry will uphold its end of the bargain in good faith. And as someone who's been repeatedly burned by my healthcare insurers over the years, please forgive me if I'd like something a little stronger in return than insurers' promises.... |
